I don’t think this “festival” promote any aspect of film industry or offer any kind of fresh or exciting affairs, from the point of view of either political concern or the academic side. China’s film industry is recently focused on the advanced skill or the evolution of technique, but, for the past one year there was no breakthrough in film concerned except for the big talk of star actors or actresses.

On the day of opening ceremony, June 16th, more than 400 well-known entertainers from inside and outside China were invited to show their beauty or handsome pose in the red carpet. In this 15th Shanghai Film Festival, media paid attention to the main actresses, such as Taiwan’s so-called first model Lin Chi-lin with her boyfriend Yen Chun-Shu, Guan Yin who is a daughter of Taiwan’s banker, Hong Kong’s Zhong Li-ti, Zhang Pai-zhi and mainland’s Lan Yen along with Li Bing-bing.

Besides, Japan’s Masaharu Fukuyama and South Korea’s Jang Dong-gun appeared with open invitation during this festival. Being the most influential feast in Asia, the festival always appeal to many fans for these fans’ appetite and sense of satisfaction. This year’s festival includes “surface of face II”, “1942”, “those who listen to winds”, “12 animals for lunar calendar” and so on. The climax happened when Hong Kong’s Chow Yun-fat received an award for all-life achievement with Zhang Chien-yin’s expressing good throat.

Overall, Chinese film is not enough to be seen as a mature one. For instance, filmmakers picked Lin Chi-lin to join in the film just for a “boring excitement”, getting backfire from her fame which never accord with her ability. When it comes to the actors or actresses in recent years, especially those who graduated from Beijing Film College, the characteristic and skill neither follow audience’s flavour nor come up with the expectation of directors or donors to the film industry. And national supervisors or officers still hold the conservative attitudes towards this field. Although this bad supply chain is being reevaluated for reconstructing, seemingly, there is only a little room for progress.

Finally, I may suggest to the Economist that fewer connection between Bo Xi-lai and film is better. Last month, according to Bloomberg, Zhang Zi-yi who was “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragons” star actress sued Apple Daily and Next Magazine Publishing’s Lai Zhai-yin (Jimmy Lai) for the fake news which said Bo concerned of “Bo and other Communist Party’s leaders had strong love affairs with Zhang.” As I knew the source, there are many geek supporting Bo with satisfying Bo’s ear and eyes. In addition to noticing Beijing to ban Hong Kong’s fake paparazzi, I, once again on the Economist’s website, saw this kind of news feeling very tired of your inclination to play with Bo’s head to knees, very boring. Of course, Xi Jin-ping and Li Ke-qiang are better candidates rather than Bo who becomes nobody. Stop any related information and let bygones be bygones.

...duhhh, what ever ! Just don't watch these above said movies in Colorado. I mean Aurora, Colorado.

Or at least carry a weapon with you into the moviehouse, according to a conservative Republican congressman. Earlier today, on a Sunday morning talk show, this anti gun control advocate said, "had one of James Holmes' victims carried a gun with him that dark 'massacre' night, he/she might had been able to shoot dead the 24-yr old mass murderer."

Twisted logic ! Now this type of sick subject, you'd agree, should definitely be censored and never be allowed to be promoted or produced for mass consumption. Young peoples' minds, regardless of country and background, are easily corrupted.

Censorship is nevertheless essential for China's movie industry. China's culture is collectivity-centered, rather than individual-oriented. In the social sphere, there would be informal authority in comparision to the formal authority of government. These informal authority would wield its power on the people. If the government doesn't interfere, some people who possess these informal authority will push the mass in the wrong direction, at least some people will be deceived or harmed by them.

In the case of movie industry, some directors will choose some intriguing topics which are obsessing and will be quite lucrative if made into movies. Those directors and cast will make tremendous profits for themselves but their films are just like spiritual drugs which would plunge the nation into decline. So movie censorship shouldn't be loosened.

Is the Chinese society so naive minded that few movies will brainwash them *in wrong direction*. Governments all over the world should stop treating their citizens as school children and give them some respect. I am sure that Chinese people are mature enough to differentiate between fiction shown in movies and real world. Let the people decide whether the movie is fit for claps or rotten tomatoes.

Thanks for your insightful remark. However, I don't assume that Chinese society are so weak-minded that they tend to be dictated by a certain kind of culture. But however mature they are, they tend to be influenced by popular culture. It is the same case in every country. So the direction of popular culture is significant for a society to maintain prosperity. In the market economy age, not everyone's voice carries the same weight in shaping popular culture. It is not one person one vote. Rather it is one dollar one vote. So the popular culture may well be manipulated by a few wealthy ones. They want to makes profits. However, what tends to be most profitable tends to be culturally inferior. Even if some people struggle to make some superior culture, such elite cultural products will not gain proper profits. So that is the monopoly of culture. Bad culture gains the upper hand over the good one. This is the power of money.
I don't say that this is definitely the case. But it is highly possible in capitalist society. So the guidance of cultural direction by social elite is indispensible.

The main thrust of it seems to be saying that the party is overreacting when it censors such a wide array of topics. The communist party survived six extermination campaigns, the Japanese invasion, the Civil War, the Korean War, the Great Leap Forward, and the Cultural Revolution. A movie isn't going to bring them down.

Then the article at the end seems to support the party view and imply that their fear of these movies is actually warranted, that there is a risk of history repeating itself.

I appreciate your succinct one-sentence summary of what the communist party survived in the period of Chinese history you covered (Post Opium War), inclusive of the Japanese invasion (foreign aggression) and the Cultural Revolution (self on self). None of these historical events can be denied or glossed over in any objective and responsible discussion of contemporary development in China, be it economic, political, cultural or societal.

My own impression is that TE journalists are, in general, not all, woefully insufficient in their knowledge of China - its history, geography, language, culture, and people.

Unaware of this insufficiency, they go on to cultivate a culture of sensation-seeking headlines and under-researched yet confidently represented conclusions. All in the good name of "journalistic reporting".

There are exceptions. From time to time, a good non-inflammatory article would appear, subtracting no relevant facts, adding no gratuitous editorial.

"History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce." Karl Marx. Too bad the current leadership transition in the Chinese Communist Party, which is supposed to be devoutly Marxist, mirrors so much the events that took place in 206BC that its censors are nervous about this movie.